BUS FPX 3021 Assessment 1 Case Law Analysis – Contract Law

BUS FPX 3021 Assessment 1 Case Law Analysis – Contract Law

Name

Capella university

BUS-FPX3021 Fundamentals of Business Law

Prof. Name

Date

Case Law Analysis

CITGO Asphalt Refining Co. et al. v. Frescati Shipping Co., Ltd., et al. (2020)

Petitioner: CITGO Asphalt Refining Company, et al. (CARCO)
Respondent: Frescati Shipping Co., Ltd., et al.
Court and Date Decided: United States Supreme Court. Decided: March 30, 2020

Background

The incident in question involved the Star-managed oil tanker Athos I, which was sub-chartered by CARCO. While en route from Venezuela to New Jersey in 2004, the tanker’s hull was punctured by an abandoned ship anchor during docking at the CITGO facility in Paulsboro, New Jersey, resulting in the spillage of 264,000 gallons of crude oil into the Delaware River. This spill disrupted shipping activities and contaminated over 45 miles of shoreline in New Jersey, Pennsylvania, and Delaware. Frescati Shipping Company, the ship owner, bore cleanup costs of $133 million, as mandated by the 1990 Oil Pollution Act, 33 U.S.C. 2702(a). Frescati was subsequently reimbursed $88 million from the U.S. Oil Spill Liability Trust Fund (Associated Press, 2011).

The U.S. government and Frescati then pursued legal action against CARCO for breaching the safe berth clause in the subcharter agreement, which held CARCO responsible for maintaining a safe berth for the vessel near their docks. Initially ruled in favor of CARCO by the U.S. District Court, the case was subsequently appealed to the Third Circuit Court of Appeals, which partially vacated the District Court’s decision, leading to a review. The District Court affirmed CARCO’s responsibility to maintain a safe berth, placing the burden of cleanup on CARCO.

BUS FPX 3021 Assessment 1 Case Law Analysis – Contract Law

Following an unsuccessful appeal by CARCO to the Third Circuit, the case was brought before the Supreme Court to determine the interpretation of the “safe berth” clause and whether it constituted a warranty of safety or a duty of due diligence. Justice Sotomayor wrote, “The question before us is whether the safe-berth clause is a warranty of safety, imposing liability for an unsafe berth regardless of CARCO’s diligence in selecting the berth. We hold that it is” (Schuler, 2020). The Supreme Court’s decision on March 30, 2020, upheld CARCO’s liability for maintaining a safe berth, affirming the Third Circuit’s decision in a 7-2 majority opinion, with two justices dissenting.

Business Impact

This ruling may negatively affect charterers’ businesses as they are now tasked with ensuring the safety of their dock areas, potentially incurring significant costs. In the realm of marine commerce, where complexity abounds, a due diligence approach may be more appropriate, with all parties taking responsible actions. However, the decision will also compel waterway cleanup efforts, yielding positive impacts on the surrounding ecological environment and reducing the likelihood of future oil spills.

Legal and Ethical Compliance

The circumstances leading to this incident lacked ethical consideration, particularly regarding the monitoring of hazardous materials at CARCO’s docks. The Supreme Court’s decision, following a deontological approach, held charterers accountable for vessel safety while in dock. This ethical stance aligns with the demands of addressing oil spill issues consistently and underscores the importance of legal responsibility in marine commerce.

Impact on Specific Organization

As an exemplar, Marine Chartering Company, a global transportation brokerage firm specializing in ocean transportation, logistics, and freight brokerage, will need to rigorously maintain their docks to prevent potential ecological disasters caused by ship damage. Moving forward, detailed contractual clauses regarding “safe berth” warranties will be imperative, as liability may now rest solely with dock owners.

References

CITGO Asphalt Refining Co. et al. v. Frescati Shipping Co., Ltd. (2020). Retrieved January 25 from https://caselaw.findlaw.com/us-supreme-court/18-565.html

Schuler, M. (2020, March 31). U.S. Supreme Court Rules in Favor of Ship Owner in Athos I ‘Safe Berth’ Case. GCaptain. Retrieved January 25 from https://gcaptain.com/u-s-supreme-court-rules-in-favor-of-ship-owner-in-athos-i-safe-berth-case/

The Associated Press. (2011, April 15). Citgo cleared of $177M cleanup of Delaware River in Paulsboro after 2004 oil spill. NJ.COM. Retrieved January 25 from https://www.nj.com/news/2011/04/citgo_cleared_of_177m_cleanup.html

BUS FPX 3021 Assessment 1 Case Law Analysis – Contract Law

Frazin, R. (2020, March 20). Supreme Court rules Citgo responsible for 2004 oil spill. The Hill. Retrieved January 25 from https://thehill.com/policy/energy-environment/490153-supreme-court-rules-citgo-responsible-for-2004-oil-spill/

Shillington, G., & Grant-Knight, C. (n.d.). CITGO Asphalt Refining Co. v. Frescati Shipping Co., Ltd. Legal Information Institute. Retrieved January 25 from https://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/cert/18-565

George, J. (2004, November 29). Delaware River Oil Spill Leaves Wildlife Imperiled. The New York Times. Retrieved January 25 from https://www.nytimes.com/2004/11/29/nyregion/delaware-river-oil-spill-leaves-wildlife-imperiled.html

Marine Chartering. (n.d.). LinkedIn. Retrieved January 25 from https://www.linkedin.com/company/marinechartering

Marine Chartering Company. (n.d.). About Us. Retrieved January 25 from https://www.marinechartering.com/about.html

BUS FPX 3021 Assessment 1 Case Law Analysis – Contract Law

ADDITIONAL INSTRUCTIONS FOR THE CLASS

SCORE A+ WITH HELP FROM OUR PROFESSIONAL WRITERS – BUS FPX 3021 Assessment 1 Case Law Analysis – Contract Law

We will process your orders through multiple stages and checks to ensure that what we are delivering to you, in the end, is something that is precise as you envisioned it. All of our essay writing service products are 100% original, ensuring that there is no plagiarism in them. The sources are well-researched and cited so it is interesting. Our goal is to help as many students as possible with their assignments, i.e. our prices are affordable and services premium. BUS FPX 3021 Assessment 1 Case Law Analysis – Contract Law

• Discussion Questions (DQ)

Initial responses to the DQ should address all components of the questions asked, including a minimum of one scholarly source, and be at least 250 words. Successful responses are substantive (i.e., add something new to the discussion, engage others in the discussion, well-developed idea) and include at least one scholarly source. One or two-sentence responses, simple statements of agreement or “good post,” and responses that are off-topic will not count as substantive. Substantive responses should be at least 150 words. I encourage you to incorporate the readings from the week (as applicable) into your responses. BUS FPX 3021 Assessment 1 Case Law Analysis – Contract Law

• Weekly Participation

Your initial responses to the mandatory DQ do not count toward participation and are graded separately. In addition to the DQ responses, you must post at least one reply to peers (or me) on three separate days, for a total of three replies. Participation posts do not require a scholarly source/citation (unless you cite someone else’s work). Part of your weekly participation includes viewing the weekly announcement and attesting to watching it in the comments. These announcements are made to ensure you understand everything that is due during the week. BUS FPX 3021 Assessment 1 Case Law Analysis – Contract Law

• APA Format and Writing Quality

Familiarize yourself with the APA format and practice using it correctly. It is used for most writing assignments for your degree. Visit the Writing Center in the Student Success Center, under the Resources tab in Loud-cloud for APA paper templates, citation examples, tips, etc. Points will be deducted for poor use of APA format or absence of APA format (if required). Cite all sources of information! When in doubt, cite the source. Paraphrasing also requires a citation. I highly recommend using the APA Publication Manual, 6th edition.

• Use of Direct Quotes

I discourage over-utilization of direct quotes in DQs and assignments at the Master’s level and deduct points accordingly. As Masters’ level students, it is important that you be able to critically analyze and interpret information from journal articles and other resources. Simply restating someone else’s words does not demonstrate an understanding of the content or critical analysis of the content. It is best to paraphrase content and cite your source. BUS FPX 3021 Assessment 1 Case Law Analysis – Contract Law

• LopesWrite Policy

For assignments that need to be submitted to Lopes Write, please be sure you have received your report and Similarity Index (SI) percentage BEFORE you do a “final submit” to me. Once you have received your report, please review it. This report will show you grammatical, punctuation, and spelling errors that can easily be fixed. Take the extra few minutes to review instead of getting counted off for these mistakes. Review your similarities. Did you forget to cite something? Did you not paraphrase well enough? Is your paper made up of someone else’s thoughts more than your own? Visit the Writing Center in the Student Success Center, under the Resources tab in Loud-cloud for tips on improving your paper and SI score. BUS FPX 3021 Assessment 1 Case Law Analysis – Contract Law

• Late Policy

The university’s policy on late assignments is a 10% penalty PER DAY LATE. This also applies to late DQ replies. Please communicate with me if you anticipate having to submit an assignment late. I am happy to be flexible, with advance notice. We may be able to work out an extension based on extenuating circumstances. If you do not communicate with me before submitting an assignment late, the GCU late policy will be in effect. I do not accept assignments that are two or more weeks late unless we have worked out an extension. As per policy, no assignments are accepted after the last day of class. Any assignment submitted after midnight on the last day of class will not be accepted for grading.

• Communication

Communication is so very important. There are multiple ways to communicate with me: Questions to Instructor Forum: This is a great place to ask course content or assignment questions. If you have a question, there is a good chance one of your peers does as well. This is a public forum for the class. Individual Forum: This is a private forum to ask me questions or send me messages. This will be checked at least once every 24 hours. BUS FPX 3021 Assessment 1 Case Law Analysis – Contract Law

• Guarantee

• Zero Plagiarism
• On-time delivery
• A-Grade Papers
• Free Revision
• 24/7 Support
• 100% Confidentiality
• Professional Writers

• Services Offered

• Custom paper writing
• Question and answers
• Essay paper writing
• Editing and proofreading
• Plagiarism removal services
• Multiple answer questions

We will process your orders through multiple stages and checks to ensure that what we are delivering to you, in the end, is something that is precise as you envisioned it. All of our essay writing service products are 100% original, ensuring that there is no plagiarism in them. The sources are well-researched and cited so it is interesting. Our goal is to help as many students as possible with their assignments, i.e. our prices are affordable and services premium. BUS FPX 3021 Assessment 1 Case Law Analysis – Contract Law

Looking for a Similar Assignment? Order a custom-written, plagiarism-free paper